20 October 2026
10:00 AM EST / 4:00 PM CET
Architectures of Extraction.
ALEJANDRO CARRASCO HIDALGO
Universidad de Alcalá
Respondent: Rebecca Yuste, The Warburg Institute
![]()
Colonial priest baptising a Equatoguinean man on the bank of a river, 1946. Film still from La gran cosecha, Hermic Films. (Filmoteca Española Archives, Madrid).
***
Soviet Women Architects in the Early 20th Century
IULIIA TUMDAG
Middle East Technical University
Respondent: İpek Mehmetoğlu, Manchester Metropolitan University
![]()
(Left image) Architect M. V. Fechner photographed on the lakeshore in Pereslavl-Zalessky,holding a camera and a cigarette, 1952. (Shchusev Museum of Architecture Archives, Fond ОФ-4829/224,page 1.)
(Right image) Before the opening of MOPRA Pavilion. members of the Presidium of theComintern. From left to right: Bogdanov (facing the camera)– representative of the CentralCommittee of MOPR; author- architect F. Ya. Belostotskaya; representative of Italy. (ShchusevMuseum of Architecture Archives, Fond ОФ-4829/15, page 10.)The architecture of the making of the author: Tracing the pedagogy of the "loge" in the Ecole des Beaux-Arts tradition.
10:00 AM EST / 4:00 PM CET
Architectures of Extraction.
The Construction of Territory in Francoist Spain: Subjects, Technologies and Imaginaries
ALEJANDRO CARRASCO HIDALGO
Universidad de Alcalá
Respondent: Rebecca Yuste, The Warburg Institute
Colonial priest baptising a Equatoguinean man on the bank of a river, 1946. Film still from La gran cosecha, Hermic Films. (Filmoteca Española Archives, Madrid).
The Francoist regime that emerged in the aftermath of the Spanish Civil War confronted a nation devastatedby conflict and marked by increasing international isolation. Consequently, from its inception, Francoism turned towards its own territory as a repository of exploitable resources—both material and human. This inward orientation, derived from the impossibility of pursuing a large-scale colonial project after the loss ofits American and Asian possessions in the aftermath of the Spanish–American War (1898), necessitated the instrumentalisation of domestic resources as both a productive and imaginative mechanism in the service ofnation-building.
Through the establishment of networks of production and extraction, new spatial configurations were generated that not only represented but actively intended to construct—both physically and symbolically—forms of life consonant with the prevailing ideological framework. This research analyses how the deployment of technical and productive infrastructures across the Spanish territory functioned as afoundational element in the modernisation of the extractive enterprise, simultaneously embodying andreinforcing the nationalist discourse. The construction of dams, rural settlements, and energy plants thus gave material expression to a particular ecology: a network of interrelations that articulated renewed (andoften reinterpreted) modes of coexistence between humans, resources, and territory.
By examining archival imagery and cartographic material in conjunction with the discursive apparatuses ofpropaganda (up-down) and cultural production (down-up) the project interprets the spaces of Francoist extraction as key sites in the (fictional) fabrication of the national social body. In this regard, thearchitectures of extraction and the urban scenes derived from them are understood as operative devices in the production of distinct subjectivities: the rural subject (internal colonisation), the colonial subject (colonisation in Africa), and the urban subject (energy colonisation).
Through the establishment of networks of production and extraction, new spatial configurations were generated that not only represented but actively intended to construct—both physically and symbolically—forms of life consonant with the prevailing ideological framework. This research analyses how the deployment of technical and productive infrastructures across the Spanish territory functioned as afoundational element in the modernisation of the extractive enterprise, simultaneously embodying andreinforcing the nationalist discourse. The construction of dams, rural settlements, and energy plants thus gave material expression to a particular ecology: a network of interrelations that articulated renewed (andoften reinterpreted) modes of coexistence between humans, resources, and territory.
By examining archival imagery and cartographic material in conjunction with the discursive apparatuses ofpropaganda (up-down) and cultural production (down-up) the project interprets the spaces of Francoist extraction as key sites in the (fictional) fabrication of the national social body. In this regard, thearchitectures of extraction and the urban scenes derived from them are understood as operative devices in the production of distinct subjectivities: the rural subject (internal colonisation), the colonial subject (colonisation in Africa), and the urban subject (energy colonisation).
***
Soviet Women Architects in the Early 20th Century
IULIIA TUMDAG
Middle East Technical University
Respondent: İpek Mehmetoğlu, Manchester Metropolitan University
(Left image) Architect M. V. Fechner photographed on the lakeshore in Pereslavl-Zalessky,holding a camera and a cigarette, 1952. (Shchusev Museum of Architecture Archives, Fond ОФ-4829/224,page 1.)
(Right image) Before the opening of MOPRA Pavilion. members of the Presidium of theComintern. From left to right: Bogdanov (facing the camera)– representative of the CentralCommittee of MOPR; author- architect F. Ya. Belostotskaya; representative of Italy. (ShchusevMuseum of Architecture Archives, Fond ОФ-4829/15, page 10.)The architecture of the making of the author: Tracing the pedagogy of the "loge" in the Ecole des Beaux-Arts tradition.
This study presents the first comprehensive, archive-based investigation into the lives and work of Soviet women architects throughout the twentieth century, with a particular focus on graduates of the 1920s. It examines how the radical social, political, and economic transformations following the Bolshevik Revolution reshaped the architectural profession and the roles of women within it. Inspired by archival discoveries—such as the jubilee albums of architects L. B. Neroslavskaya, T.A. Chizhikova, S. A. Kaufman, F. Ya. Belostotskaya, M. M. Gaken, M. M. Pevzner, M. V. Fechner, and E. Z. Cherikover, which contain biographical records, student works, and professional projects collected in Moscow and St. Petersburg—this research seeks to uncover the full scope of female contributions to Soviet architecture. The central question motivating this study is why there were no widely recognized Soviet women architects in the 1920s.
The study reconstructs the educational paths, professional trajectories, and design contributions of women who graduated from key Soviet institutions, including VKhUTEMAS, MIGI, MVTU, the Leningrad Higher Art and Technical Institute, and the Leningrad Institute of Civil Engineers (LIGI). It also identifies patterns of participation within influential architectural collectives, suc as ARU, ASNOVA, OSA, and various architectural unions active during the first and second Five-Year Plans, demonstrating how women played substantial roles in avant-garde architectura experiments, urban planning, and design competitions.
Employing an interdisciplinary approach informed by feminist scholarship, the study analyzes early 1920s gender reforms that enabled women to enter male-dominated professions and explores how Bolshevik ideological concepts sought to transform everyday life and social hierarchies. By recovering the histories of these pioneering women from largely unexplored archival sources, this research addresses a significant gap in Soviet architectural historiography and contributes to broader debates on gender, professional recognition, and the social dimensions of architecture in the socialist context.
The study reconstructs the educational paths, professional trajectories, and design contributions of women who graduated from key Soviet institutions, including VKhUTEMAS, MIGI, MVTU, the Leningrad Higher Art and Technical Institute, and the Leningrad Institute of Civil Engineers (LIGI). It also identifies patterns of participation within influential architectural collectives, suc as ARU, ASNOVA, OSA, and various architectural unions active during the first and second Five-Year Plans, demonstrating how women played substantial roles in avant-garde architectura experiments, urban planning, and design competitions.
Employing an interdisciplinary approach informed by feminist scholarship, the study analyzes early 1920s gender reforms that enabled women to enter male-dominated professions and explores how Bolshevik ideological concepts sought to transform everyday life and social hierarchies. By recovering the histories of these pioneering women from largely unexplored archival sources, this research addresses a significant gap in Soviet architectural historiography and contributes to broader debates on gender, professional recognition, and the social dimensions of architecture in the socialist context.